Thursday, June 30, 2011

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

I will confess to a having a mild obsession for the American Declaration of Independence, It is a magnificently written document that expresses in glorious Jeffersonian prose, the hopes, and dreams of the people living in those thirteen British colonies in 1776.

Not surprising, the Fourth of July, has always been one my favorite holidays. I love all the Americana that goes with it. When I lived in Chicago, I would practically force my friends to come with me and picnic in Grant Park where we would sit on the grass eating watermelon, waving sparklers and listening to the Chicago Symphony play “Stars and Stripes Forever” as the fireworks boomed over our heads.

It was always at that moment, seeing the thousands of people around me cheering and waving flags, I’d feel so fortunate to have been born an American. A nation that, despite all its flaws and foibles , has nevertheless, never stopped striving to be that place Katherine Lee Bates called “American the Beautiful”.

The experience of celebrating American independence from outside the United States is not a new one for me. This will be the tenth July 4th holiday in my life, spent as an “ex pat” . Six of those were spent in Germany, one in South Korea and this next Monday , will be my third here in the UK. Friends and co-workers here, were surprised to learn I was not going to take the day off next Monday. I had thought about it, but when you get right down to it, Monday, July 4th, is just another workday here. So when in Rome... or in this case, London...

Yet being honest, I will admit there are other reasons I find myself feeling somewhat ambivalent about the Fourth of July this year, and it (as always) goes back to the document that started it all. That Declaration of Independence. Here is what the ubiquitous internet oracle Wikipedia has to say about the declaration:

" The Declaration justified the independence of the United States by listing colonial grievances against King George III, and by asserting certain natural rights, including a right of revolution.

Having served its original purpose in announcing independence, the text of the Declaration was initially ignored after the American Revolution. Its stature grew over the years, particularly the second sentence, a sweeping statement of human rights:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

I have always loved those words, because at their core, they proclaim why American was designed to be different. What would set us apart from the other nations of the world. No feudal systems of hereditary privilege for us, thank you very much. You keep your Kings, and Dukes and Earls and Viscounts and whatnot.

For us, America would be a place where even a skinny mixed race kid from Hawaii, with a name like Barack Hussein Obama can grow up to be President. (Hey Europe! Do ya’ like apples? Well, how about them apples!)

The United States of America would be democracy in its truest form. "E Pluribus Unum" From out of many, one with liberty and justice for.... Well, you know rest. At least that's how it's all supposed to work.

The problem is, as a nation we have an unfortunate habit of not always living up to our Jeffersonian prose. Especially when it comes to that whole, all men are created equal, bit. It took us over 140 years after the abolition of slavery to elect a President who wasn't white.

As recently as 40 yrs ago, many people argued that to apply that idea of equality throughout the country was a violation of "States Rights". Many in Southern States said it was State Law that should decide who could work where, who could go to what school, how some people could vote, and who could marry who. All based on the color of a person's skin.

In the 1963, President Kennedy took the issue head on.

The lesson of the great civil rights struggle of the 20th Century was that the Federal Government has a role to protect the rights of all Americans from bigotry and discrimination cloaked in the camouflage of "States Rights". Jefferson's exhortation of unalienable Rights, wasn't just for some people living in some parts of the United States. It was for everyone. Well at least it is supposed to be. In 2011 it turns out those rights are for... almost everyone.

The argument of states rights is back. In the 21rst Century it is not race, but rather the idea that Same Sex couples might deserve the same BASIC civil rights and protections as everyone else, that is causing more debate than the proposal to declare independence from Great Britain provoked back in 1776.

So the United States continues to cling to a law that prevents any recognition of Same Sex couples by the Federal Government. Of course I am talking about the ridiculously mis-named "Defense of Marriage Act." (DOMA) It provides the legal excuse for the United States to discriminate against me and my spouse, and over 40,000 bi-national same sex couples just like us.

So thanks to DOMA, the Federal Government has a problem with my wanting to enjoy the same rights as any other American. It is the fact that the person I am legally married to here in the United Kingdom, has the audacity to be the same gender as I am. Now if Eric was female then Uncle Sam would give us his blessing no questions asked. I would be able to sponsor my spouse for permanent residency in the U.S. and my government ( that I support through my taxes), would beam it's approval down upon us both. But the fact that Eric is a man just as I am, means that as far as my government is concerned , our relationship doesn't even exist.

Now, I really didn't want to leave my country. Unlike Sarah Palin and the scared gullible bigots that hang on her every twitter posting, I really do believe that the greatness of the United States lies in our diversity. "E Pluribus Unum" - Out of Many , One. Yet for me to do something as basic as have that pursuit of happiness. To be with the person I am married to, I had to do just that. Leave my country.

So now I live here, in the United Kingdom. Because unlike in 1776, in 2011 it is the people of Great Britain who have more civil rights and greater freedom than Americans do. Unlike in 1776, in 2011 it is the American Government, not the British Crown, that subjects its people to unfair taxation without representation. Unlike in 1776, it is The United States of America that has politicians seeking to preserve a status quo of inequality and treats groups of its own citizens unfairly.

What is perhaps most confusing for us, and thousands of couples like us, is that in 2011, that states right argument is not being made by bigoted, angry State officials. This time the argument that basic civil rights should be left up to the states to decide, is being made by the first African American President of the United States.

So for the federal government to step in and enforce the constitution is the feds "poking its nose into what states are doing"?? I will say it again; if Presidents' Truman, Kennedy and Johnson had all approached civil rights for African Americans, the way Barack Obama is for LGBT Americans, the Military, public schools, and most public services would still be segregated in many parts of the U.S. His own parents would not have been allowed to marry in 3/4 of the country.

I can't help but wonder how Barack Obama would feel, if in order to stay together with his wife Michelle, he had to leave the U.S and move overseas. Oh wait... I don't have to wonder how he would feel...

He'd feel like I do.

Have a great Fourth of July Weekend everyone. Those of us in "DOMA Exile" will be thinking of you , and waiting for America to finally live up to those words Jefferson penned, 235 years ago.

Monday, June 27, 2011

I once blogged about how the arguments against Marriage Equality for Lesbian and Gay Americans were at best, seriously flawed and in all truth, nothing more than fear mongering driven by a warped and twisted mis-use of the Christian Faith.

With the passage of Marriage Equality in New York, the passage of Civil Union legislation in Illinois, and the repeal of "Don't Ask Don't Tell"; 2011 has not been a good year for hating "the Gays". Yet with national polls showing that for the first time, a majority of Americans support Marriage Equality, the hate groups on the right, and far right who make their living on spreading that hate and homophobia are reacting to their recent setbacks in classic and all too predictable ways...

They are losing their frigging minds...

The ridiculously mis-named hate group the "National Organization for Marriage" has developed only what can be described as "twitter turrets syndrome". Their spokesbigot, Bryan brown has been blurting out random twitter postings vowing almost jihadist like political vengence on all the NY State Senate Republicans who supported Marriage Equality in the Empire State.

The good folks over at the Catholic League took time out from blaming the victims of Clergy sex abuse for what Priests did to them, to vent their rage and indignation that all people in New York were going to be treated equally under the law. Their proposed solution? Why write their particular brand of Catholic -Sharia Law into the United States Constitution of course... Cue spokesbigot Bill Donahue

"Standing in the way of a constitutional amendment is the legitimate reluctance on the part of federal lawmakers to decide what many believe to be a matter for the states. But given that we are left with the scenario of the people vs. the elites, we are quickly reaching a tipping point, and when that happens, chances are good that this issue will be resolved by a constitutional amendment."

Nothing like taking a felt tip marker to the nation's founding documents when people you don't like get treated equally to you, is there Bill? Not to be left out , everyone's favorite demented hate monger, Pat Robertson weighed in with his favorite tune. "GOD WILL DESTROY AMERICA!

If you have a strong stomach for a bucket of extra crazy with a side order of hate, this video should make your day...

Interestingly enough there is one other notable person who is on the record as opposing Marriage Equality who we have not heard from. President Obama.

The President says his view on Marriage Equality is "evolving". I guess that might make sense if you define evolution as going backwards. In 1996 Barack Obama said he was in favor of Marriage Equality. Now in 2011, President Barack Obama has a problem. In 2008 he clearly said he is opposed to Marriage Equality for Gay and Lesbian couples, because Marriage is an issue he says should be decided by the States. but at the same time he says he believes those same couples should have equal rights.

Uh... huh?

By that logic Barack Obama feels the federal government should have let states decide voting standards and not pass the Voting Rights Act. Racial integration should have been left up to individual States to decide, and the Loving v. Virgina court decision that struck down laws against interracial marriage was an overreach by the federal judiciary.

So if Presidents' Truman, Kennedy and Johnson had all approached civil rights the way Barack Obama does, the Military, public schools, and most public services would still be segregated in many parts of the U.S. His own parents would not have been allowed to marry in 3/4 of the country.

And in all likelihood, rather than being President of the United States Barack Obama would be an underpaid teacher at a small Black College, who would have to pass a test, and pay a special "tax" each time he wanted to vote.

The New York Times on today's Editorial Page couldn't help but comment on the contradictions...

On Thursday night, when same-sex marriage in New York State was teetering on a razor’s edge, President Obama had a perfect opportunity to show the results of his supposed evolution on gay marriage.

Unfortunately, he did not take it, keeping his own views in the shadows. The next night the Republican-led New York State Senate, of all places, proved itself more forward-thinking than the president on one of the last great civil-rights debates in this nation’s history."

So clear and obvious is the case FOR Marriage Equality that today the American Medical Association issued a statement saying that Marriage Equality is even HEALTHY. Saying in a statement released today: “The AMA now joins every other mainstream public health organization in America in making the case for providing the freedom to marry – and the critical safety-net that comes with marriage – to loving, committed same-sex couples.”

So it begs the question. Why are social conservatives hell-bent (pardon the expression) on doing as much damage to the lives of Gay and Lesbian Americans as they can? Because the bible tells them so? Not really. The bible says a lot more about hatred of others, and about loving your neighbor, and about lying. In fact the bible has 8 verses that mention homosexuality and over 300 that condemn heterosexual behavior. This isn't about following the word of God... Not even remotely.

My favorite television show, "The West Wing" tackled that issue head on in a story where the White House was hosting a reception for Talk Radio hosts. Including one not so loosely based on "Dr." Laura Schlessinger. Who famously called LGBT Americans a "biological error."

The American Right Wing's opposition to LGBT rights is very simple to explain. It makes money. The far right in the United States has nothing left to run for. Their policies don't work, their ideas of; "Let's tax the poor, give that money to the rich and everybody will be better off!" Have failed, and failed miserably. The last four national elections in the United States have been, for the Republicans about two things, and two things only.

Anger and Fear.

To win elections the GOP fully understands it needs two things. It's rabid, non-thinking base, and enough independent voters to get to fifty percent plus 1. That my friends is the Karl Rove play book. To do that they need their base out in full force. The GOP base is a group that is not really all that big on voting for things, rather they are far more motivated to vote against things. So the Republican Party and the rabid dog social conservative movement that owns it now, is desperate to keep one group in America it is still safe to hate. Still safe to vilify. Still safe to say "look out! they are coming for you !".

For the GOP those groups used to be Blacks and Latinos. But the demographics of the U.S. Population have changed in ways that make that a losing proposition nowadays. You can't bash women, or Jews anymore (sorry Pat Buchanon...) The whole "every muslim is a terrorist" ploy stopped working when it became clear George W. Bush raised and lowered the terror alerts based on his poll numbers. So who's left? Oh that's right.....The Gays.

Desperate Bigots...

Someone once asked me what would I ever do if I won a huge lottery jackpot. I'd file lawsuit after endless lawsuit against these anti gay bigots to make them pay for the harm they have done to millions of Americans all in the name of politically expedient hate.

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

Sunday, June 19, 2011

When it comes to shooting yourself in the foot, and pulling defeat out of the jaws of victory, no political party on earth even comes close to the skill and acumen of the Democratic Party in the United States.

This past week in Minneapolis, MN was the annual Netroots Nation conference. A gathering of progressive bloggers, organizations and activists from all over the country. For many attendees this was a chance to share a growing frustration on the Progressive Left, with the Democratic Party in general, and the Obama Administration specifically.

Former Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold opened the event with a great keynote address, where he challenged progressives to keep the pressure on politicians and political parties. Yet for many progressives, 2012 is looked upon with a painful mixture of anger, disappointment and yes, even disinterest. The frustration of the left with President Obama covers a wide range of issues. From the issue of detention of terror suspects in Cuba, to Jobs and the Economy to perhaps what is the most baffling contradiction of all. President Obama's bizarre almost twister-esqe policy contortions on the issue marriage equality.

Back in 1996, then Illinois State Senator Barack Obama answered a questionnaire sent out by Windy City Media, a Chicago LGBT media company. One of the questions dealt directly with the issue of Same Sex Marriage. Here is a scan of the actual form Barack Obama filled out and sent in the the LGBT newspaper the Windy City Times:

In response to the questions, US Senate candidate Obama wrote “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages,and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages,” and then signed his signature to the bottom of the form. Pretty clear right?

Well apparently not...

While answering questions at Netoots Nation, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer claimed the 1996 questionnaire, which has Barack Obama's signature clearly on the bottom of it, was "actually filled out by someone else." "If you actually go back and look, that questionnaire was actually filled out by someone else, not the President."

Faced with one of its own officials claiming a document that clearly has Barack Obama's signature on it was a forgery. The White House was quick to move into damage control, issuing a statement:

“Dan was not familiar with the history of the questionnaire that was brought up today, but the president’s views are clear," The statement said. "He has long supported equal rights and benefits for gay and lesbian couples and since taking office he has signed into law the repeal of 'Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,' signed into law the hate crimes bill, made the decision not to defend Section 3 of DOMA and expanded federal benefits for same sex partners of federal employees.”

Hmmm... Interesting, but still does nothing to answer the real question here. This was a very lame evasion of the real issue. So, the White House Communications Director "was not familiar" with the questionnaire, but said it was "litigated during during the campaign" and the President wasn't the one who filled it out? So Dan Pfeiffer is psychic?

Netroots Nation had a great panel discussion on the growing dissaffection with the President in the LGBT community, entitled "What to do when the President is just not that into you..." If you have the time, the panel is worth watching. The basic message to come out of the discussion was one of disappointment with the reality that Barack Obama is not a progressive on civil rights.

On top of everything else, this week saw the media and political circus surrounding New York Congressman Anthony Weiner (D) reach a fever pitch. As many key Democrats, including President Obama, saying that Weiner should resign. Here's an excerpt of the exchange between NBC's Ann Curry and President Obama on the matter:

ANN CURRY: Should Congressman Anthony Weiner resign?

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, obviously what he did was highly inappropriate. I think he's embarrassed himself, he's acknowledged that, he's embarrassed his wife and his family. Ultimately there's going to be a decision for him and his constituents. I can tell you that if it was me, I would resign. Because public service is exactly that, it's a service to the public. And when you get to the point where, because of various personal distractions, you can't serve as effectively as you need to at the time when people are worrying about jobs and their mortgages and paying the bills, then you should probably step back.

Now, the issue is not, and has never been, one of Anthony Weiner's behavior. It was bad, and wholly inappropriate for a member of the U.S House of Representatives. The issue is, and remains; Why is such behavior acceptable when a Republican does it?

In their baying calls for the political head of Congressman Anthony Weiner, the GOP practically handed their own blatant hypocrisy to the Democrats on a silver platter with bow tied around it, and a card the read "USE THIS PLEASE!" It was a golden ticket giving the Democrats the chance to finally frame the issues of Republicans putting partisan gain above, country above sanity and above decency. It was a issue begging to be flogged on every Sunday talk show, talked about in every cable interview and press conference.

This was the chance to finally place front and center in the national debate the issue of the Republican Party's singular aim of politics over reality at any and all cost. So what happened? I'd let you guess, but that would be too easy. So I'll let the always brilliant Rachel Maddow bring you the sad saga...

The Obama 2012 brain trust would be wise to listen to the conversation currently happening on the Progressive Left. They need to come to grips with a blindingly obvious conclusion, Barack Obama can't run the campaign he ran in 2008.

Obama 2008 ran Barack Obama as a bold progressive, but Barack Obama as President has been at best, a timid centrist.

David Axelrod seems to be betting that whoever the Republicans nominate to run against the President, will have so much Tea Party baggage from the GOP primary process, that independent voters will flock to re-elect President Obama. The flaw in that thinking is the same one the John Kerry campaign suffered from. The GOP knows that to win it will need BOTH it's base and the independents. The Democrats seem to think they just need the independents.

The GOP will have a long primary season to drum up support, energy and enthusiasm from their Base. The Democrats wont. The Obama Campaign's hope that independent voters will remember the nuttiness of the GOP primary when they go to vote in the General Election is at best, wishful thinking, and in truth woefully ignorant.

The Obama Administration has managed in three years to alienate the Labor, Latino and LGBT communities. It's true that these groups of voters generally won't vote Republican. Yet unless President Obama can show he can be more than a man who gives eloquent but meaningless speeches, the Democratic base, may simply stay home on election day.

Monday, June 13, 2011

Wednesday, June 08, 2011

Over here on this side of the Atlantic, the media has been riveted to the saga of professional footballer Ryan Giggs whose multiple affairs and legal manuervering to hide it from the press and public, spawned a much larger debate on the issues of privacy, and legal injunctions which are often used to prevent the press from reporting on private indiscretions.

The story here has been so big, that I nearly missed the latest bit of fun and frolic from back over on the other side of the pond....

Back in the U.S., a well known member of the U.S. Congress, found himself on a scandal of his own, where a whole series of jokes have been writing themselves!(via the GuardianUK...)

A painfully embarrassing week for the New York Democratic congressman Anthony Weiner was brought to an excruciating denouement when he admitted that he had sent sexually suggestive photographs of himself over the Internet, confessed to lying to cover it up but said that he was not resigning.

In a half-hour press conference during which he at several times was fighting back tears, Weiner made a total and grovelling apology. After days in which he had at first claimed the photographs were hacked out of his computer and sent without his knowledge, he said he took responsibility for his "dumb" actions.

"To be clear, the picture was of me, and I sent it. I'm deeply sorry for the pain this has caused my wife, and our family, my constituents, my friends, my supporters and my staff," he said.

(Insert ready made "Weiner" joke here.....)

Sigh... and for that matter.. eww! (I won't post the pictures in question here, if you are really curious, you can Google them for yourself.)

A number of friends of mine on the political right have had a great deal of fun with this "scandal" over the past few days. Right on cue the Republican Party was in front of any camera and microphone with calls for "Congressman Pervert" to resign. After all what Congressman Weiner did was shameful, and... icky...., AND he had the audacity to LIE about it! That is certainly a "beyond the pale" offense... right?

Mind you , the REPUBLICANS would never tolerate that kind of thing in their caucus... right?

You have to love this age of digital media we are living in... Cue Rachel Maddow with today's reality check....

Now as much as I find what Anthony Weiner did, to be ... Well, I was about to say unbecoming of a member of Congress, but apparently this sort of thing is par for the course there... That being said, as much fun as it would also be to rehash famous GOP "Sexting" scandals, (one of the more famous ones of which involved underage congressional Pages.) It hardly seems worth the effort.

It's gotten to the point where blogging about Republican hypocrisy doesn't even require any real work. It is a narrative that writes itself.

Saturday, June 04, 2011

By now the long sad story of the rise and fall of former Senator, Vice Presidential and Presidential candidate John Edwards has come to its sadder conclusion with a federal indictment for violation of campaign finance laws. Edwards is charged with using nearly one million dollars of campaign funds to cover up his extra-marital affair, and child with television producer Rielle Hunter.

I supported John Edwards when he ran for president in 2004, and again when he ran in 2008, I was even a blogger for his campaign on his "One America" website. I donated money, I volunteered at rallies and worked phone banks for the Edwards campaign in California. When the news of the affair and love child with Hunter broke, like many people I was very angry.

Lots of people asked me at the time if I "regretted" supporting his campaign. That is complex question. At the time I blogged on here, that the issues and positions Edwards publicly championed in his campaign were still as relevant and important as ever. The actions in his private life didn't change that.

What angered most Americans about the whole sordid saga, was what John Edwards did to his wife, Elisabeth Edwards. I can't say that I knew Elisabeth Edwards, but I did have a number of opportunities to meet her, and on two occasions had the chance to talk with her one on one. She was an extraordinary person. In 2007 she was the only national democratic figure to speak at San Francisco Pride. That same year, she gave an amazing speech at the San Francisco Human Rights Campaign Dinner. I was sitting in the audience that night.

As I sit here in London, typing this blog entry, I think of my political scrapbook. It is a very odd bi-partisan collection, The photos and autographs range across the political spectrum. From Ronald Reagan, George HW Bush, Dan Quayle, Liddy Dole, Bob Dole, to Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and yes, both John and Elisabeth Edwards. Stapled to the page that has autographed blog entries from the Edwards Campaign blog, is a small note I received from Elisabeth Edwards in early February, 2008.

I had emailed the Edwards campaign asking the Senator to take a stronger stance on the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act. I wrote telling Eric's and my story of how this horribly bigoted, discriminatory law denied basic civil rights to us and thousands of other bi-national same sex couples just like us.

I went on to explain how DOMA was forcing me to choose between my country and the person I love. I included a link to the youtube video Eric and I had made to support the Uniting American Families Act, a proposed law that would right that wrong, and grant immigration equality to couples like us.

I honestly didn't expect to hear anything back. Maybe one of those generic "thank you for your feedback, and support", emails. What came in the mail two weeks later was a one page handwritten note from Elisabeth Edwards. She wrote ;

"David, thank you for sharing yours and Eric's story with us, I can't even begin to imagine what it must be like to make the choices you are facing. Please know that you and Eric are in John's and my thoughts. Like you , We hope to see the day when the discrimination against LGBT Americans is a thing of the past. Your Friend, - Elisabeth Edwards"

When the Edwards campaign came to end in the early Spring of 2008, like many Edwards supporters, I was torn between supporting Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama. The night before the California primary I called both campaigns and asked why they should get my vote. The Clinton campaign volunteer I spoke with talked mostly about what was "wrong" with Barack Obama. The Obama volunteer I spoke with talked about Obama's commitment to equality and opportunity for all Americans.

I voted for Obama.

As I watched the news reports on yesterday's federal indictment , a friend of mine in Arizona texted me and asked if I felt "betrayed' by John Edwards. No. John Edwards didn't betray his supporters, he betrayed his family. He failed and disappointed his supporters, and it looks like he will continue paying the price for that failure in a number of ways, personal, financial and political.